W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > December 2015

Re: BP15- A proposal for Example 15

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:46:33 +0100
Message-ID: <56698239.3080008@few.vu.nl>
To: <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi Ghislain, Bernadette,

Thanks, Ghislain!
I agree that the example fit better BP 17. However it may need some more text. I.e. what the example should tell is that it's perfectly alright to use a simple representation for a road vocabulary. One doesn't need a full ontology that would try to expressing in a formal OWL axiom that bicycle paths are roads that cannot be used by cars.

Note that I'd prefer an example made of an already existing vocabulary, not a toy example. BP 17 has been criticized as being a recommendation for building vocabularies, we should keep sending the message that it's for the wider area of creating and re-using vocabularies.

Cheers,  

Antoine

On 12/8/15 3:34 PM, Ghislain Atemezing wrote:
> Hi Berna,
>
>> Le 8 déc. 2015 à 15:07, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br <mailto:bfl@cin.ufpe.br>> a écrit :
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your example! I liked your proposal and I suggest to include it in the document.
>
> Great!
>> However, I was in doubt if we should use an existing standard instead of creating a new one. Maybe, your example is more suitable for BP17:Choose the right formalization level. What do you think?
>
> Now that I read again both BP15 and  BP17, I think you are right. The example is more suitable for BP17.
>
> Congrats again for the huge work on this document.
> Cheers,
>
> Ghislain
>
> ---------------------------------------
> Ghislain A. Atemezing, Ph.D
> Mail: ghislain.atemezing@gmail.com <mailto:ghislain.atemezing@gmail.com>
> Web:http://www.atemezing.org
> Twitter: @gatemezing
> About Me: https://about.me/ghislain.atemezing
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2015 13:47:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 10 December 2015 13:47:06 UTC